Hasselblad SWC anything to watch out for?

[Deleted member 88956]

I'm warming up to the SWC. It's uniqe but unbeknown to me. I see there is a screen for it, how useful is it? Need cloth hood or is it useful as is?

Any nuggets from users on anything SWC related would be appreciated.

 

[Sirius Glass]

I have the Hasselblad 903. There are advantages to the 903 and 905 such as the level bubble is seen in the view finder therefore I recommend them. No, a cloth hood is not needed not useful. I found that I kept taking photographs with the lens cap on so I put yellow gaffers tape on the lens cap and the top of the lens hood. That way when I look through the view finder either way I see the yellow tape and check for the lens cap.

If you have more questions please feel free to contact me directly.

 

[Deleted member 88956]

Thanks Sirius. On the cloth hood I was referring to having screen on the back and see no hood made for it, so it seems image shown will fight ambient light shining on it.

 

[Deleted member 88956]

Where does SWC/M stand in the model line up?

 

[Arthurwg]

I do think the SWC is one of the best film cameras ever produced, thanks to it's fantastic lens and utter simplicity. Suggest you go for one of the CF versions rather than the older "C" . Among other things, I have heard that the "C" lens can be knocked out of alignment , so that should be checked carefully. And yes, you can attach a ground glass/ focusing screen adapter to the back of the lens housing. (Note this can also be used with standard Hasselblad cameras). The GG can then be viewed using a magnifying hood or a prism finder. No dark cloth is necessary.

 

[mike c]

The detachable view finder is what I use, but the guy I bought the camera from preferred the focusing screen, he was a Architect and needed very precise viewing.

 

[Deleted member 88956]

Have just found THIS review which appears to be a pretty decent look at SWC, but of course a single one.

Good to know WLF attaches direct to screen adapter.

As for models I am still figuring out what the differences are - C/M/903/905/More ???

 

[KinoGrafx]

The inexpensive chimney finder works great with the swc screen also

 

[Deleted member 88956]

@KinoGrafx Great to know.

 

[mshchem]

If Hasselblad would release their new digital back this camera would be even more amazing.
I have 903SWC the focusing screen adapter works ok.

 

[etn]

The SWC is the best point-and-shoot camera out there, with the fastest „autofocus“ (if we can name it so ha ha).
Its history is very complex, as many different models were released since the SWA introduction in the 50‘s.

I am only aware of the following 2 points:
1) if you consider using it with a digital back at some point:
Earlier models than SWC/M are not compatible with a digital back - or so it was said. My understanding is that the tripod plate is in the way of the external battery or earlier backs. This probably becomes a moot point with the new CFV 50c ii, which has an internal battery.
(Side note: I tried my SWC/M with the CFV 50c ii, it works, image quality is terrific as you can expect, but it is difficult to frame as the viewfinder does not have framelines for the 33x44 sensor. Using live view is possible but cumbersome. Feel free to PM me for more details)

2) The shutter of early SWC/M with CF-type lenses is said to scratch a lens element. I never could find out whether this is urban legend or not. In my opinion it most probably is, but inspecting the lens for that before buying wouldn’t hurt...
Does someone here has more info about this?

 

[etn]

Another point: finding filters for the C-style lens can be very difficult. CF-style (later SWC/M and 903) as well as 905 use standard B60 filters.

 

[etn]

This site provides some info on SWC history:
http://www.gilghitelman.com/news_0005.html

The lens design remained identical (apart from coating) from the 1st version to the 903.
Then some element needed in lens manufacturing was banned due to environmental laws in the early 2000’s. A new lens was designed and introduced with the 905. The 905 lens is supposedly better in he corners and slightly worse in the center than he original design. (splitting hairs here) You can see the MTF charts on hasselbladhistorical.

FWIW i recently saw a used 905 at the local store for around 4500€ if I remember correctly.It is probably still there.

 

[Deleted member 88956]

The shutter of early SWC/M with CF-type lenses is said to scratch a lens element.

I hope this is urban legend. How could they put a lens together into production with shutter to lens surface so close it could do that? Unless someone had distorted shutter blade(s) that did that.

 

[etn]

I hope this is urban legend. How could they put a lens together into production with shutter to lens surface so close it could do that? Unless someone had distorted shutter blade(s) that did that.

I honestly think it is. Besides, even if the lens is scratched, what would be the loss in image quality? (I'll let the optics experts comment on this)
Here a photo.net thread discussing it:
https://www.photo.net/discuss/threads/hasselblad-swc-lens-scratches-caused-by-the-shutter.247623/
For the record, I have a T* C-type lens and the lens shows no defect whatsoever.

As we say in French, "there's no smoke without fire", but IMHO this is more smoke than fire. For what we know, it could have been due to a tech wrongly re-assembling the lens after a shutter CLA.

 

[Deleted member 88956]

@etn Yeah, I hear you.

On the film backs, I see a kit with later film back that has dark slide keeper built in. Are these backs otherwise the same to older, SNs have to match etc. ?

 

[Deleted member 88956]

Also, the viewfinders: older bodies (M and before) had bubble level mounted on top of body and prism was side mounted on finder to show it. On newer finders bubble level is finder top mounted and projected inside. I'm just guessing newer is somewhat better due to bubble being within the view while older requires a side peek to see. Any thoughts on differences in actual use?

 

[Larry Cloetta]

Also, the viewfinders: older bodies (M and before) had bubble level mounted on top of body and prism was side mounted on finder to show it. On newer finders bubble level is finder top mounted and projected inside. I'm just guessing newer is somewhat better due to bubble being within the view while older requires a side peek to see. Any thoughts on differences in actual use?

My only experience is with the SWC/M, which I have, and I have not used a 903, so this isn’t a legitimate “comparison.” But, it took me less than half a day shooting to learn how to hold my eye so that I can see and manipulate the bubble level while also seeing the entire frame in the viewfinder, and I wear glasses so probably even easier for someone without glasses. So, I have found any “difficulty” related to the earlier design to be a complete non issue for me.

 

[Deleted member 88956]

Another V-system question would be Hasselblad tripod mounting plate. I have to assume this is a solid way to mount the camera on a tripod. Anyone not liking this or using some sort of substitute going into Arca plate or something?

As I am poking around I see some decent looking deals on accessories so I need to see my future in all this.

How about sheet film holder? This one has no shelf-available sheet film and H made a cutter to ease things up. I cannot find any instructions for sheet film holder. What is the actual size of cut sheet to fit this and is exposed frame 6x6 as on roll film?

Does anyone use this holder?

 

[Sirius Glass]

Where does SWC/M stand in the model line up?

Some have the spirit level in the viewfinder. It is important to use the spirit level to avoid distortion.

 

[Sirius Glass]

2) The shutter of early SWC/M with CF-type lenses is said to scratch a lens element. I never could find out whether this is urban legend or not. In my opinion it most probably is, but inspecting the lens for that before buying wouldn’t hurt...
Does someone here has more info about this?

Yes this does happen if the camera is out of adjustment. A CLA takes care of this problem.

 

[Sirius Glass]

@etn Yeah, I hear you.

On the film backs, I see a kit with later film back that has dark slide keeper built in. Are these backs otherwise the same to older, SNs have to match etc. ?

I too add the darkslide keeper on my film backs. I do not have the latest backs with the darkslide keeper built in.

 

[Sirius Glass]

Also, the viewfinders: older bodies (M and before) had bubble level mounted on top of body and prism was side mounted on finder to show it. On newer finders bubble level is finder top mounted and projected inside. I'm just guessing newer is somewhat better due to bubble being within the view while older requires a side peek to see. Any thoughts on differences in actual use?

I always keep my eye on the bubble level, it is important to minimize the distortion.

 

[Sirius Glass]

Another V-system question would be Hasselblad tripod mounting plate. I have to assume this is a solid way to mount the camera on a tripod. Anyone not liking this or using some sort of substitute going into Arca plate or something?

As I am poking around I see some decent looking deals on accessories so I need to see my future in all this.

How about sheet film holder? This one has no shelf-available sheet film and H made a cutter to ease things up. I cannot find any instructions for sheet film holder. What is the actual size of cut sheet to fit this and is exposed frame 6x6 as on roll film?

Does anyone use this holder?

I attach a tripod quick release attachment to put it on a tripod. I rarely have to use a tripod, but if I use the attachment plate and my 45 degree PME prism if I need good precision and sharp focus for very close objects.

I have no experience with the sheet film holder on any Hasselblad.

 

[Deleted member 88956]

@Sirius Glass I have just found instructions for cut film holder. Sheet size is 6.5x6.5, so a 6.5x9 is one cut away, but does not look most economical, except Hasselblad made cutter does not seem to go well with anything but 6.5x9 sheet. Image size appears close to frame size on roll film. I'm not sure, perhaps not a bad way to go individual shots, but I thought 6.5x9 is already in small department for single shots. At least it's good it has such an option, good for me anyways.

Regarding that slide keeper, is this like an add on you can put on older backs too or these late backs are also different in other ways?